If Sony introduced subscription fees for PSN...

...would you pay for it? (assume $30-$50 annually)

...and if so, what kind of improvements would you demand, if any?

interesting question..

I dunno..lol

btw, what's up with your avy dreams? it gives me a headache!

interesting question..

I dunno..lol

btw, what's up with your avy dreams? it gives me a headache!

killerfist

But i keep on looking at it, it's addictive :(

It's not a matter of "if" its a matter of "when". And I just have a feeling by the end of the PS3's 10 year life cycle there will be a PSN fee that will continue onto the PS4. It's destine to happen.

[QUOTE="killerfist"]

interesting question..

I dunno..lol

btw, what's up with your avy dreams? it gives me a headache!

angelkimne

But i keep on looking at it, it's addictive :(

same as air_wolf_cubed's sig. you know the one with the japanese girl. I always stare at it for a few seconds:lol:

Edit: this is the one:P

also, I gave the thread some more thought and I don't think I would pay for it. all my real life friends have the 360 so I think I would just go with that. and I don't really play that much online on PSN compared to Xbox live. paying for one service is enough for me anyway.

...would you pay for it? (assume $30-$50 annually)

...and if so, what kind of improvements would you demand, if any?

Dreams-Visions

No, simple as.

It's not a matter of "if" its a matter of "when". And I just have a feeling by the end of the PS3's 10 year life cycle there will be a PSN fee that will continue onto the PS4. It's destine to happen.

ReverseCycology

it kind of already happend with qore and it could have a tier service with home...but who knows at this point

No, I'd game on a PC

Not like it's going to happen, Sony can't charge for PSN because of the "contract" included with the PS3 which states playing on PSN will always be free for the PS3. They can pretty much charge for anything else but not to play.

No. Unless it offered me something that completely blew me away I doubt I would pay for it.

Plus I usually devote my times to single player games.

NO, i won't pay any company to play a game i already payed for online.

Well then i guess i wouldn't be playing online...I refuse to pay to play a game online when i'm already paying for the cable internet.

...would you pay for it? (assume $30-$50 annually)

...and if so, what kind of improvements would you demand, if any?

Dreams-Visions

Right now I get free demos, free online play and free movie and game trailers. I honestly can't think of anything they could offer that would be worth paying for. I mean the most important part, online play is free.

...would you pay for it? (assume $30-$50 annually)

...and if so, what kind of improvements would you demand, if any?

Dreams-Visions

NO.

I dont demand anything. FREE online play with chat is all i care for.

If every game had dedicated servers....maybe.

If it was the same as Live...no.

...would you pay for it? (assume $30-$50 annually)

...and if so, what kind of improvements would you demand, if any?

Dreams-Visions

Dreams, did you ask this question in another forum? I am just curious.

Alan

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

...would you pay for it? (assume $30-$50 annually)

...and if so, what kind of improvements would you demand, if any?

scoobiesnackarf

Dreams, did you ask this question in another forum? I am just curious.

Alan

Well....no, I wouldn't use psn anymore. Having it free was and still is a major selling point for me. Taking that away would be foolish and Sony knows this too. I think that its safe to assume it will stay free.

1. no, because none of my friends are on it

2. communicative features on the level of live combined with the streamlined fast and easy use of the XMB

...would you pay for it? (assume $30-$50 annually)

...and if so, what kind of improvements would you demand, if any?

Dreams-Visions

Yes I would pay... It would be at the same time I buy Ice skates for the first big freeze in hell...

In PSN current state, absolutly not. If it made some mass improvments to bring its quality on par with Live, then I probably would, but i wouldn't be happy about it. Broman6015

That's pretty much exactly what I was thinking.

No, I wouldn't at first. I would wait to see why they deserve my money on charging for bull **** like this which should be free. Playing SOCOM: Confrontation might make me go over the edge though :( I love the SOCOM series too much to be honest.

I'm glad they're keeping it free. They don't seem to have problems financing themselves when it comes to the PSN (advertisement partnerships, Qore, microtransactions, etc.). To run an online service, if you're smart with the way you implement it, you shouldn't be forced to charge your customers. Since Sony keeps saying that they keep the PSN free and always will be (E3 presser being the latest), I'm confident PSN will always remain a free platform this gen.

...would you pay for it? (assume $30-$50 annually)

...and if so, what kind of improvements would you demand, if any?

Dreams-Visions

I don't think it's an IF, it's more like a WHEN.

After HOME is introduced, I wouldn't be surprised if Sony starts to charge fees for the usage of it.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

...would you pay for it? (assume $30-$50 annually)

...and if so, what kind of improvements would you demand, if any?

blackace

I don't think it's an IF, it's more like a WHEN.

After HOME is introduced, I wouldn't be surprised if Sony starts to charge fees for the usage of it.

PSN online gaming will always remain free. Sony has said it too much (they keep saying it) to take it back. Home is going to be free. They're keeping it free via ads. Nike is putting ads on Home, etc. There's a lot of advertising potential in Home in terms of putting banners on the town square, etc. Home will have some items that can be accessed via microtransactions. Good for the enthusiasts, good for Sony. Home is still going to be free, as the open beta is rolling, it's still free. Sony has said it too many times about PSN to take it back. It would be like shooting themselves in the foot.

[QUOTE="blackace"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

...would you pay for it? (assume $30-$50 annually)

...and if so, what kind of improvements would you demand, if any?

Albanian_Killa

I don't think it's an IF, it's more like a WHEN.

After HOME is introduced, I wouldn't be surprised if Sony starts to charge fees for the usage of it.

PSN online gaming will always remain free. Sony has said it too much (they keep saying it) to take it back. Home is going to be free. They're keeping it free via ads. Nike is putting ads on Home, etc. There's a lot of advertising potential in Home in terms of putting banners on the town square, etc. Home will have some items that can be accessed via microtransactions. Good for the enthusiasts, good for Sony. Home is still going to be free, as the open beta is rolling, it's still free. Sony has said it too many times about PSN to take it back. It would be like shooting themselves in the foot.

[QUOTE="Albanian_Killa"][QUOTE="blackace"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

...would you pay for it? (assume $30-$50 annually)

...and if so, what kind of improvements would you demand, if any?

Gta3-fan334

I don't think it's an IF, it's more like a WHEN.

After HOME is introduced, I wouldn't be surprised if Sony starts to charge fees for the usage of it.

PSN online gaming will always remain free. Sony has said it too much (they keep saying it) to take it back. Home is going to be free. They're keeping it free via ads. Nike is putting ads on Home, etc. There's a lot of advertising potential in Home in terms of putting banners on the town square, etc. Home will have some items that can be accessed via microtransactions. Good for the enthusiasts, good for Sony. Home is still going to be free, as the open beta is rolling, it's still free. Sony has said it too many times about PSN to take it back. It would be like shooting themselves in the foot.

There's a difference between overhyping before launch than actually keeping a service in the path you keep saying for 3 years straight. Big difference. EVERY console is overhyped at launch by the companies.

Nope, I do most of my online gaming on PC anyway. So I miss out on some console multiplayer? Ehh... who cares.

I don't think it's an IF, it's more like a WHEN.

After HOME is introduced, I wouldn't be surprised if Sony starts to charge fees for the usage of it.blackace

I think it's funny when Lems try to justify paying for Live by saying "PSN will probably have fees soon, just wait!"

[QUOTE="Gta3-fan334"][QUOTE="Albanian_Killa"][QUOTE="blackace"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

...would you pay for it? (assume $30-$50 annually)

...and if so, what kind of improvements would you demand, if any?

Albanian_Killa

I don't think it's an IF, it's more like a WHEN.

After HOME is introduced, I wouldn't be surprised if Sony starts to charge fees for the usage of it.

PSN online gaming will always remain free. Sony has said it too much (they keep saying it) to take it back. Home is going to be free. They're keeping it free via ads. Nike is putting ads on Home, etc. There's a lot of advertising potential in Home in terms of putting banners on the town square, etc. Home will have some items that can be accessed via microtransactions. Good for the enthusiasts, good for Sony. Home is still going to be free, as the open beta is rolling, it's still free. Sony has said it too many times about PSN to take it back. It would be like shooting themselves in the foot.

There's a difference between overhyping before launch than actually keeping a service in the path you keep saying for 3 years straight. Big difference. EVERY console is overhyped at launch by the companies.

...would you pay for it? (assume $30-$50 annually)

...and if so, what kind of improvements would you demand, if any?

Dreams-Visions

I hope they don't. The best thing for us gamers would be PSN improving while staying free and thereby forcing MS to drop the XBL fee.the-very-best

I dont think that will ever happen. M$ will always find a reason to try and justify the XBL pricetag.